State and Local Elected Officials for Immigration Reform

The introduction of Arizona’s harsh immigration-related law enforcement bill (SB 1070) has intensified the immigration debate on all sides, with local lawmakers who oppose a patchwork of state and local immigration regulations leading the way toward a rational national debate on immigration reform.

I invite you to join your peers serving in municipal and state government in combating Arizona type legislation and signing the pledge card below to voice your support for comprehensive immigration reform.

Contact Dawn Mabery at dmabery@immigrationforum.org for more information.

Fight Back Against Arizona-style Legislation

Fiscal, social and political costs are causing Arizona-inspired bills to lose momentum.

As part of a series of state level periodic snapshots of how SB 1070-style laws and other measures seeking to marginalize immigrants only serve to further worsen state fiscal problems, each week the National Immigration Forum releases a fiscal memo for a different state. Click the links for the memos: Mississippi, California, Illinois and Ilinois Blog.

Deficits, Lawsuits and Diminished Public Safety: Your State Can’t Afford SB1070 - This report explains factors (state deficits, legal challenges to SB 1070 and public safety concerns) that state lawmakers should consider when debating whether or not to bring SB 1070-style legislation to their states.

Utah Compact Case Study - This report provides a closer look at the process that led to the Utah Compact, and what factors could make similar efforts in other states successful.

Unconstitutional and Costly: The High Price of Local Immigration Enforcement, Center for American Progress, January 24, 2011

Press Call: Unconstitutional and Costly *Listen to the recorded call

Local Immigration Enforcement Cost by the Numbers, Center for American Progress, January 25, 2011

Checklist for Estimating the cost of SB 1070-style Legislation, Immigration Policy Center, January 2011

What Legislators Can Do

Helpful Materials for Opposing Arizona-style legislation

Over 50 States/Localities Passed Resolutions Opposing Arizona SB 1070

Template Resolution Opposing Arizona SB 1070

CIR Resolutions (passed prior to signing of Arizona SB 1070)

Research, Polling and Talking Points

New Evidence Shows the Latest Immigrants to America Are Following in Our History's Footsteps

With Election Looming, Three Polls Confirm Immigration Tops Latino Voter Concerns

Public Opinion and the Arizona Immigration Law: What Do Voters Support and Why?

The Economic & Political Power of Immigrants, Latinos and Asians in all 50 States

Costly in Every Way: Anti-Immigrant Laws Hurt States Financially

Arizona Style Legislation

This year, states where legislation mirroring the Arizona SB 1070 law in varied form has been introduced include California- Assembly Bill 26, Colorado- Senate Bill 54, Florida- Senate Bill 136, Illinois- House Bill 6937, Indiana- Senate Bill 590 , Kentucky- Senate Bill 6 , Mississippi- Senate Bill 2179 and House Bill 54, Nebraska- Legislative Bill 48, South Carolina- Senate Bill 20 and House Bill 3129 and Texas- House Bill 17.

However, due to fiscal, social and political costs, Arizona-inspired bills are losing momentum. Many have stalled, died or are being reworked. Efforts to push back on these measures include:

Last year, legislators publicly indicated their intent to introduce Arizona-style legislation in the following states: Alabama, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Virginia.

Five states - Michigan, South Carolina, Minnesota, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island - introduced laws similar to Arizona. The Rhode Island and South Carolina bills failed to be heard in committee before adjournment. In Michigan, the bill's author was aware that the bill was unlikely to pass and that other immigration legislation she proposed has not made it out of committee.

Efforts to pass Arizona SB 1070-type measures in Nevada and Kansas also failed. A petition initiative in Nevada was halted due to a several lawsuits. In Kansas, an amendment to the budget bill failed due to a procedural challenge and was ruled out of order.

Legal Opinions, Information and Resources on SB 1070

The Legal Challenges and Economic Realities of Arizona’s SB 1070, Immigration Policy Center

ACLU of Arizona Section by Section Analysis of SB 1070 “Immigration; Law Enforcement; Safe Neighborhoods”, American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona

Video: Arizona’s Immigration Crackdown, Center for American Progress

Fast Facts on Arizona’s Immigration Crack Down: The New Law’s Dangerous Economic, Social, and Legal Consequences, Center for American Progress

Arizona SB 1070 Blogs

Setbacks for SB 1070 Lead Authors of Copycats to Reconsider their Bills August 2

Gov. Jan Brewer Went Too Far: States Seeking to Copycat, Take Note July 29

Judge Ruling: Another Blow to Arizona SB 1070 and its Copycats July 28

Over 45 Resolutions Opposing SB 1070 Have Passed July 22

Local Legislators Commend DOJ Challenge Of Arizona SB 1070 July 6

State and Local Lawmakers Applaud Obama’s Immigration Speech And Want Action to Follow His Words July 2

Massachusetts rejects Arizona-style copycat legislation, resolutions opposed to Arizona grow in numbers June 29

Push Back: At least 60 Local Measures Oppose Arizona S.B. 1070 June 18

Join by signing the pledge below!

Supporters

ELECTED LEADERS PLEDGE

I am pleased to pledge my support for comprehensive immigration reform based on the following principles:

1)   The states, cities and towns of America are a melting pot of cultures and nationalities based on our nation’s history of welcoming immigrants from around the world. Our immigrant forebears and those living here now strengthen the economic, social, and civic foundations of our country and bring vitality to state and local communities around the U.S. Reforming the nation’s immigration system is an important component of ensuring America’s sustained economic recovery.

2)   As state and local officials, we acknowledge that immigrants are part of the fabric of American life. When admitted through a well-regulated system, immigrants strengthen the United States by creating economic opportunities, increasing America’s scientific and cultural resources, strengthening our ties with other nations, fulfilling humanitarian commitments, and supporting family ties and family values that are necessary to build strong communities.

3)   Immigration reform must be comprehensive and include: improving the economic situation of all workers in the United States; legalizing the status of undocumented immigrants working and living in the United States; reforming visa programs to keep families together, protecting workers’ rights, and ensuring that future immigration is regulated and controlled rather than illegal and chaotic; implementing smart, effective enforcement measures targeted at the worst violators of immigration and labor laws; prioritizing immigrant integration into our communities and country; and respecting the due process rights of all in the United States.

4)   A fair means for undocumented immigrants to become full contributing members of our society. Requiring undocumented immigrants to come forward, register and get on a path to full legal status and eventual citizenship would help restore the rule of law, eliminate exploitation of immigrant workers, and strengthen opportunities for all workers, including native U.S. workers.

5)   The financial impact of new immigrants on state and local governments must be recognized as part of a comprehensive approach. The federal government should provide local governments with financial and technical assistance in providing social services, health care, education, language services, and civic integration.

Please feel free to use my name for the State and Local Elected Leaders for Immigration Reform's website and materials pertaining to it's principles.

This petition is no longer active.